My thanks to those who offered advice. I found a mirror to hold by his nose, as per Dr Sox, and whilst I was trying to work out where in the bundle of curled fur his nose actually was and how I could get a mirror close to it I saw an ear flicker. So the old boy is still alive and just not ready for his tea yet (age and too many prawns at lunchtime I suppose).
Phew, thanks to all.
@Pulpstar Simba's 6.8kg seems an awful lot. The chap across the road has a Siamese that got into that range (mainly I think because at least two of the neighbours were also feeding his cat) and it has cost him an arm and a leg on Vet's bills.
Hooray!
How old is Thomas? My last cat got to 20, which I thought was pretty impressive.
He is 19, Mrs Free. At his last check-up his very nice young German lady vet declared him in remarkable physical condition for his age. However, it is clear that he is getting on. He doesn't do much these days except eat and sleep and sometimes we catch him in an odd position as if he had started to do something (like turn around) and then forgot half way through what it was he wanted to do. However, he still enjoys his meals (he has just woken up and wandered into the kitchen demanding roast chicken, and no rubbish from Tesco either), snoozing in the garden when the sun is out and snuggling up to Herself after his evening cheese ration. So the quality of life is still there.
A mere 19? Pah! He could have 11 years left yet. Or 19, if he wants to emulate Creme Puff....only at the half-way point!
In the meantime I'm kicking my heels because our software supplier's cloud storage crashed a week last Friday and they haven't been able to get it back up again.
Whoops. Hope you've got a punitive service level agreement with them.
It's not just me - it applies to a significant percentage of the UK insurance broker market - customers can't renew policies, change their vehicles etc, etc etc.
The suppliers are now restoring backups, but you can imagine the chaos with 10 days work to catch up on.
I think, in the end, the difference between is is that I feel the way the EU was going, the UK was not compromising within the EU but being overridden and that the reality of the power relationships were such that the problem would get worse rather than better.
A matter of degree, as you say, but sometimes these can be crucial.
The difference between those who did not much like the EU but thought on balance we should Remain and those who felt the same but thought on balance we should Leave is not as great as the division into Leavers/Remainers might suggest.
I was an "on balance remainer" and while leaving the EU may not be a good idea, attempting to circumvent the referendum result would be a very much worse idea - so time to get on with it.....
I agree. But that was not what was on the Leavers' big red battle tin. I agree that as @RobD has noted, the fact that we can choose what immigration system we have (although of course the single market negotiations will be acute in that respect), is an indication of our sovereignty. But what difference will it make to the country when the inevitable fudge is agreed?
Well we will have decided, of course. Just us. But as you say, the exogenous factors are such that the claim of sovereignty becomes less meaningful.
You raise a very legitimate question.
But I think you underestimate the value - to some - of decisions being made by politicians in Britain, answerable to the British electorate - rather than being made elsewhere. Self-government, even when this involves trade-offs rather than total freedom to do exactly what you want, regardless of others' wishes, is a value in itself. Rather an important one, IMO. And when it is missing all sort of other things go wrong with our political culture.
In reality, we will have to negotiate and this will necessarily involve compromises. But that is better than having decisions made for you, which you may well think against your interests, because you have in effect been outvoted by politicians who are not answerable to the British electorate.
I rather dislike this poo-poohing (and I am not addressing this to you personally) of democracy. The people may, in some eyes, be foolish but I prefer a system where foolish people have a say to one where they don't.
Of course, I agree with your last point. I (although I appreciate you had not said I had) do not pooh-pooh democracy. The opposite, as my comments on eg. UKIP, Tony Blair's Gulf war, and Brexit demonstrate.
And again without wishing to fight old battles, I think there is a matter of degree rather than substance between compromising to achieve benefit for the country outside the EU as we are about to do, and agreeing as a sovereign nation to compromise on various issues within the EU, as we have done these past few decades.
I think, in the end, the difference between is is that I feel the way the EU was going, the UK was not compromising within the EU but being overridden and that the reality of the power relationships were such that the problem would get worse rather than better.
A matter of degree, as you say, but sometimes these can be crucial.
The difference between those who did not much like the EU but thought on balance we should Remain and those who felt the same but thought on balance we should Leave is not as great as the division into Leavers/Remainers might suggest.
On topic, interesting and credible article by Joff. Like Joff and unlike Don (who still forgets to mention his campaign role when he posts), I think Corbyn will win, but I wouldn't say that I expect a landslide for him. There are lots of old-guard members who are reluctantly voting for Smith, and indeed this is the converse of the reasonably Corbyn supporters who Joff has talked to: my old guard contacts are mostly not especially anti-Corbyn, they just don't feel he's doing well. The middle ground of people who want Labour to stand for something interesting AND win is quite large. The big missing piece of the puzzle is a credible alternative with an interesting programme.
In case anyone reads this as wavering, I have a pro-Corbyn piece coming out on Labour List tomorrow. But there is more common ground than wild-eyed people of any faction might like to think.
But I think you underestimate the value - to some - of decisions being made by politicians in Britain, answerable to the British electorate - rather than being made elsewhere. Self-government, even when this involves trade-offs rather than total freedom to do exactly what you want, regardless of others' wishes, is a value in itself. Rather an important one, IMO. And when it is missing all sort of other things go wrong with our political culture.
In reality, we will have to negotiate and this will necessarily involve compromises. But that is better than having decisions made for you, which you may well think against your interests, because you have in effect been outvoted by politicians who are not answerable to the British electorate.
I rather dislike this poo-poohing (and I am not addressing this to you personally) of democracy. The people may, in some eyes, be foolish but I prefer a system where foolish people have a say to one where they don't.
Of course, I agree with your .
Indeed before Brexit we had a part in drafting the rules. Now our European neighbours will draft the rules. Our place is only to decide whether we sign up to others rules, or leave the business off.
Or design our own rules which may be more attractive to business than EU rules. There is no need for us to be passive players.
We did in theory have a part in drafting rules. In reality, our chances of getting something we wanted or stopping something that we thought harmful to our interests were pretty small. The gap between the theory and reality was wide and getting wider. The failure of all politicians, British and European, to deal with this is one reason why Brexit happened.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
In the meantime I'm kicking my heels because our software supplier's cloud storage crashed a week last Friday and they haven't been able to get it back up again.
Whoops. Hope you've got a punitive service level agreement with them.
It's not just me - it applies to a significant percentage of the UK insurance broker market - customers can't renew policies, change their vehicles etc, etc etc.
The suppliers are now restoring backups, but you can imagine the chaos with 10 days work to catch up on.
Wow. In what world does it take ten days to restore backups? I'd be lynched if it took ten hours!
The perils of relying on someone else's servers to run a business - if there's lots of insurance companies affected, there's a reasonable chance of a class action against the supplier for negligence if it takes them so long to restore a system.
HARD BREXIT: "I have nothing to offer you except blood, toil, sweat and a prolonged period of economic uncertainlty, over and above the natural state of things."
Michael Crick Labour MPs to hold ballot tomorrow on whether to return to system of Lab MPs electing Shadow Cabinet. Ballot agreed at PLP without dissent
Paul Waugh Clive Betts tols plp his Shad Cab elections plan was "conciliatory proposal". Not a single person spoke against. Ballot between 10 + 5 tmrw
But I think you underestimate the value - to some - of decisions being made by politicians in Britain, answerable to the British electorate - rather than being made elsewhere. Self-government, even when this involves trade-offs rather than total freedom to do exactly what you want, regardless of others' wishes, is a value in itself. Rather an important one, IMO. And when it is missing all sort of other things go wrong with our political culture.
In reality, we will have to negotiate and this will necessarily involve compromises. But that is better than having decisions made for you, which you may well think against your interests, because you have in effect been outvoted by politicians who are not answerable to the British electorate.
I rather dislike this poo-poohing (and I am not addressing this to you personally) of democracy. The people may, in some eyes, be foolish but I prefer a system where foolish people have a say to one where they don't.
Of course, I agree with your last point. I (although I appreciate you had not said I had) do not pooh-pooh democracy. The opposite, as my comments on eg. UKIP, Tony Blair's Gulf war, and Brexit demonstrate.
And again without wishing to fight old battles, I think there is a matter of degree rather than substance between compromising to achieve benefit for the country outside the EU as we are about to do, and agreeing as a sovereign nation to compromise on various issues within the EU, as we have done these past few decades.
Indeed before Brexit we had a part in drafting the rules. Now our European neighbours will draft the rules. Our place is only to decide whether we sign up to others rules, or leave the business off.
Or design our own rules which may be more attractive to business than EU rules. There is no need for us to be passive players.
We did in theory have a part in drafting rules. In reality, our chances of getting something we wanted or stopping something that we thought harmful to our interests were pretty small. The gap between the theory and reality was wide and getting wider. The failure of all politicians, British and European, to deal with this is one reason why Brexit happened.
As you know only too well, much of the impetus for and much of the content of much of the European financial services regs have been BoE and FSA/FCA-inspired.
Will they continue to be? Perhaps. It is a gamble because the EU will now take its lead from the legislators, not the regulators.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
Michael Crick Labour MPs to hold ballot tomorrow on whether to return to system of Lab MPs electing Shadow Cabinet. Ballot agreed at PLP without dissent
Paul Waugh Clive Betts tols plp his Shad Cab elections plan was "conciliatory proposal". Not a single person spoke against. Ballot between 10 + 5 tmrw
The PLP continues it's plots, since they can't defeat Corbyn they will try to castrate him.
However Corbyn is one step ahead and is now proposing that the shadow cabinet be elected by the members instead of the PLP, basically reverting control back to him through the members.
The discussion on what immigration system we should have is a prime example.
Teresa May apparently is of the view that we should start with a control on immigration and work backward towards the single market. This from a woman who was the Home Secretary who failed to implement government policy on immigration for six consecutive years. Leaving aside the EU people, each year another 150k non-EU people also came in. They were and are still "controllable", if that is what she / they wanted to do.
Don`t worry, Mr Surbiton. We now have somebody else as Home Secretary. I cannot remember who he is, but I am sure he is much more competent than Mrs May ever was.
Her name is Amber Rudd, who famously said during the Brexit campaign:
‘Boris? Well, he’s the life and soul of the party but he’s not the man you want driving you home at the end of the evening.’
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
But I think you underestimate the value - to some - of decisions being made by politicians in Britain, answerable to the British electorate - rather than being made elsewhere. Self-government, even when this involves trade-offs rather than total freedom to do exactly what you want, regardless of others' wishes, is a value in itself. Rather an important one, IMO. And when it is missing all sort of other things go wrong with our political culture.
In reality, we will have to negotiate and this will necessarily involve compromises. But that is better than having decisions made for you, which you may well think against your interests, because you have in effect been outvoted by politicians who are not answerable to the British electorate.
I rather dislike this poo-poohing (and I am not addressing this to you personally) of democracy. The people may, in some eyes, be foolish but I prefer a system where foolish people have a say to one where they don't.
Of course, I agree with your .
Indeed before Brexit we had a part in drafting the rules. Now our European neighbours will draft the rules. Our place is only to decide whether we sign up to others rules, or leave the business off.
Or design our own rules which may be more attractive to business than EU rules. There is no need for us to be passive players.
We did in theory have a part in drafting rules. In reality, our chances of getting something we wanted or stopping something that we thought harmful to our interests were pretty small. The gap between the theory and reality was wide and getting wider. The failure of all politicians, British and European, to deal with this is one reason why Brexit happened.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If the analysis you reference is even halfway correct then the failure of British politicians and the EU itself to sell the EU and Britain's membership in it as a good thing is a quite remarkable failure.
Michael Crick Labour MPs to hold ballot tomorrow on whether to return to system of Lab MPs electing Shadow Cabinet. Ballot agreed at PLP without dissent
Paul Waugh Clive Betts tols plp his Shad Cab elections plan was "conciliatory proposal". Not a single person spoke against. Ballot between 10 + 5 tmrw
Surely the rule book isn't so badly written as to allow the PLP to vote themselves more powers over the leader?
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
Though WTO rules are not as simple as they sound!
Signing up totrade agreements while over a barrel with the clock ticking is doomed to failure. Either agree to something sub-optimal or get hard Brexit without preparation.
Better to plan for hard Brexit, breaking off all institutional ties, then start negotiations.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
Michael Crick Labour MPs to hold ballot tomorrow on whether to return to system of Lab MPs electing Shadow Cabinet. Ballot agreed at PLP without dissent
Paul Waugh Clive Betts tols plp his Shad Cab elections plan was "conciliatory proposal". Not a single person spoke against. Ballot between 10 + 5 tmrw
The PLP continues it's plots, since they can't defeat Corbyn they will try to castrate him.
However Corbyn is one step ahead and is now proposing that the shadow cabinet be elected by the members instead of the PLP, basically reverting control back to him through the members.
It is clearly not a conciliatory proposal - that much is clear - but a vote of PLP means nothing. It has to go before conference.
But I think you underestimate the value - to some - of decisions being made by politicians in Britain, answerable to the British electorate - rather than being made elsewhere. Self-government, even when this involves trade-offs rather than total freedom to do exactly what you want, regardless of others' wishes, is a value in itself. Rather an important one, IMO. And when it is missing all sort of other things go wrong with our political culture.
In reality, we will have to negotiate and this will necessarily involve compromises. But that is better than having decisions made for you, which you may well think against your interests, because you have in effect been outvoted by politicians who are not answerable to the British electorate.
I rather dislike this poo-poohing (and I am not addressing this to you personally) of democracy. The people may, in some eyes, be foolish but I prefer a system where foolish people have a say to one where they don't.
Of course, I agree with your .
Indeed before Brexit we had a part in drafting the rules. Now our European neighbours will draft the rules. Our place is only to decide whether we sign up to others rules, or leave the business off.
Or design our own rules which may be more attractive to business than EU rules. There is no need for us to be passive players.
We did in theory have a part in drafting rules. In reality, our chances of getting something we wanted or stopping something that we thought harmful to our interests were pretty small. The gap between the theory and reality was wide and getting wider. The failure of all politicians, British and European, to deal with this is one reason why Brexit happened.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
Only Leadsom, Gove and maybe Boris would have done hard BREXIT, May is sensible and will not send the economy into recession and potentially break up the Union just to appease UKIP and a few fanatics on the Tory right
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
They would not be, they would just transfer the investment to the Continent, the Japanese have no sentimental attachment to the UK as the document yesterday made clear, if we leave the single market completely they are not going to raise their costs out of any loyalty to us
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
Nissan Sunderland employs 6,700 people. I'm sure it supports many more in its supply chain, but it would be quite jolly if we could stop pulling numbers out of our collective arses.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
They would not be, they would just transfer the investment to the Continent, the Japanese have no sentimental attachment to the UK as the document yesterday made clear, if we leave the single market completely they are not going to raise their costs out of any loyalty to us
Ah, hadn't realised how easy it was to move a factory
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
That, and i think people recognise there may also be a heavy socio-cultural price for those gains (e.g. mass immigration) which many are not happy with.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
Well the Greeks are in that position: they have neither the economic nor the political advantages of being in the EU.
Of course people don't want to be poor. But those who think that economics is the alpha and omega of politics (a very Marxist view, it has to be said) forget that self-respect is also important.
Ireland would probably have done better economically had it remained within the British Empire. But the economy does not always trump everything for everyone.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
They would not be, they would just transfer the investment to the Continent, the Japanese have no sentimental attachment to the UK as the document yesterday made clear, if we leave the single market completely they are not going to raise their costs out of any loyalty to us
If one is shutting sites, paying out huge redundancy payments, and then purchasing land, plant, and hiring fresh workers in another country, that's a huge write off.
That's got to be Microsoft Edge, best off binning it, its just clickbait
WTF has that got to do with anything? It's obviously a bit of conversation prompter.
Are you competing for FunSponge of the Day?
its where that sort of rubbish comes from, the 20 films with the actress with the biggest boobs, the 29 films where the actor/actress looks ghastly now compared to 20 yrs ago, that sort of crap, clogs up you pc downloading ads and videos.. avoid like the plague...
But I think you underestimate the value - to some - of decisions being made by politicians in Britain, answerable to the British electorate - rather than being made elsewhere. Self-government, even when this involves trade-offs rather than total freedom to do exactly what you want, regardless of others' wishes, is a value in itself. Rather an important one, IMO. And when it is missing all sort of other things go wrong with our political culture.
In reality, we will have to negotiate and this will necessarily involve compromises. But that is better than having decisions made for you, which you may well think against your interests, because you have in effect been outvoted by politicians who are not answerable to the British electorate.
I rather dislike this poo-poohing (and I am not addressing this to you personally) of democracy. The people may, in some eyes, be foolish but I prefer a system where foolish people have a say to one where they don't.
Of course, I agree with your .
Indeed before Brexit we had a part in drafting the rules. Now our European neighbours will draft the rules. Our place is only to decide whether we sign up to others rules, or leave the business off.
Or design our own rules which may be more attractive to business than EU rules. There is no need for us to be passive players.
We did in theory have a part in drafting rules. In reality, our chances of getting something we wanted or stopping something that we thought harmful to our interests were pretty small. The gap between the theory and reality was wide and getting wider. The failure of all politicians, British and European, to deal with this is one reason why Brexit happened.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one g snip
Only Leadsom, Gove and maybe Boris would have done hard BREXIT, May is sensible and will not send the economy into recession and potentially break up the Union just to appease UKIP and a few fanatics on the Tory right
Seriously? What nonsense re Gove and Boris - and Leadsom spent years learning about the complexities but could be pushed.
TBH, I'm mostly bored of Brexit stuff for now. We've had a referendum, a result, a new PM and it's still early days. It's conference that will be interesting.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
Nissan Sunderland employs 6,700 people. I'm sure it supports many more in its supply chain, but it would be quite jolly if we could stop pulling numbers out of our collective arses.
Hitachi has a plant in the North East, Toyota in Derby, Fujitsu UK is based in Birmingham and a big Midlands employer etc. South Korea coming out with the same message as Japan today
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
They would not be, they would just transfer the investment to the Continent, the Japanese have no sentimental attachment to the UK as the document yesterday made clear, if we leave the single market completely they are not going to raise their costs out of any loyalty to us
If one is shutting sites, paying out huge redundancy payments, and then purchasing land, plant, and hiring fresh workers in another country, that's a huge write off.
Companies do it all the time. Not saying the Japanese will or won't, but large-scale restructurings all involve the things you mention because the longer term benefits will have been forecast to outweigh the immediate cost.
If the analysis you reference is even halfway correct then the failure of British politicians and the EU itself to sell the EU and Britain's membership in it as a good thing is a quite remarkable failure.
I know, depressing innit.
We are likely to realise that we can actually do little about migration (that is not economically harmful), and I wouldn't mind betting we will not change the CFA and CAP arrangements much either. We have already signalled that we are likely to stay in the EAW.
So Brexit will amount to a significant loss of trade influence, the ability to sign our own deals, and an enhanced feeling of sovereignty.
Somehow we fooled ourselves it was the "EU", when it was us all along. Perhaps, if anything, Brexit means coming face to face with reality.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
Oh, the too poor and stupid to understand rationale again. We're perfectly capable of making an assessment, thanks awfully.
On the PLP Shad Cab (heh) elections.. surely this is good for the rebels?
It depends whether they want to be blamed for GE 2020 meltdown. If they are in Shadow Cabinet and obviously causing the anointed one difficulties, then they will be seen as guilty by the Corbynista surely?
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
Nissan Sunderland employs 6,700 people. I'm sure it supports many more in its supply chain, but it would be quite jolly if we could stop pulling numbers out of our collective arses.
Hitachi has a plant in the North East, Fujitsu UK is based in Birmingham and a big Midlands employer etc
Do you have a source for your 400,000 job losses in the North East and Midlands quote?
But I think you underestimate the value - to some - of decisions being made by politicians in Britain, answerable to the British electorate - rather than being made .
In reality, we will have to negotiate and this will necessarily involve compromises. But that is better than having decisions made for you, which you may well think against your interests, because you have in effect been outvoted by politicians who are not answerable to the British electorate.
I rather dislike this poo-poohing (and I am not addressing this to you personally) of democracy. The people may, in some eyes, be foolish but I prefer a system where foolish people have a say to one where they don't.
Of course, I agree with your .
Indeed before Brexit we had a part in drafting the rules. Now our European neighbours will draft the rules. Our place is only to decide whether we sign up to others rules, or leave the business off.
Or design our own rules which may be more attractive to business than EU rules. There is no need for us to be passive players.
We did in theory have a part in drafting rules. In reality, our chances of getting something we wanted or stopping something that we thought harmful to our interests were pretty small. The gap between the theory and reality was wide and getting wider. The failure of all politicians, British and European, to deal with this is one reason why Brexit happened.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
In theory, we could have surrendered even greater levels of sovereignty for a 1/60th of a say in a pan-continental union stretching across Europe, Africa and the Middle East.
Yes, that's a bit silly - but I say it to make a point: at some stage there is a tipping point between influence and being influenced against your wishes.
The U.K. electorate decided that the EU had progressed past that point, and were on the balance of probabilities likely to go even further in future, and so voted to Leave.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
That's got to be Microsoft Edge, best off binning it, its just clickbait
WTF has that got to do with anything? It's obviously a bit of conversation prompter.
Are you competing for FunSponge of the Day?
its where that sort of rubbish comes from, the 20 films with the actress with the biggest boobs, the 29 films where the actor/actress looks ghastly now compared to 20 yrs ago, that sort of crap, clogs up you pc downloading ads and videos.. avoid like the plague...
Does anyone actually care who they are ..
You thought it was worth pontificating on with your funsponge head on. Again.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
If thousands of skilled lower middle-class workers lose their jobs in the Midlands with the knock on to the local economy bang goes May's majority at the next election, they may even have nothing to lose by voting for Corbyn. There are some Tory Marginals like Stockton in the North East too
"Facing a weak, unpopular and incompetent Labour leader in Jeremy Corbyn, the Tories could not just hold on to power in 2020 - but win with a landslide."
There can be no reconciliation after this if Jezza wins.
Things can only get worse, as I think we said in 1997.
On the PLP Shad Cab (heh) elections.. surely this is good for the rebels?
It depends whether they want to be blamed for GE 2020 meltdown. If they are in Shadow Cabinet and obviously causing the anointed one difficulties, then they will be seen as guilty by the Corbynista surely?
And Corbyn isn't obliged to give them real jobs...
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
Nissan Sunderland employs 6,700 people. I'm sure it supports many more in its supply chain, but it would be quite jolly if we could stop pulling numbers out of our collective arses.
"NMUK is one of the most productive car plants in Europe, producing more 'cars per worker' than any other factory." Wikipedia
That was also true in early 1990s. Quite remarkable that it is still the case 20 years later. What company would throw away that asset?
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
If thousands of skilled lower middle-class workers lose their jobs in the Midlands with the knock on to the local economy bang goes May's majority at the next election, they may even have nothing to lose by voting for Corbyn
Thousands of lower middle class workers aren't going to lose their jobs.
On the PLP Shad Cab (heh) elections.. surely this is good for the rebels?
It depends whether they want to be blamed for GE 2020 meltdown. If they are in Shadow Cabinet and obviously causing the anointed one difficulties, then they will be seen as guilty by the Corbynista surely?
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
Antarctic cruise tourism is doing better, I gather. I honestly can't see what makes the EU so attractive on economic grounds - it's a crater.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
Well the Greeks are in that position: they have neither the economic nor the political advantages of being in the EU.
Of course people don't want to be poor. But those who think that economics is the alpha and omega of politics (a very Marxist view, it has to be said) forget that self-respect is also important.
Ireland would probably have done better economically had it remained within the British Empire. But the economy does not always trump everything for everyone.
Yes and Greece has a hard left party in government, hard BREXIT is the one way Corbyn may get into number 10, even only with an SNP pact
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
I think the idea of taking back control may be something which appeals more to the poor than to the rich. If you're rich you can buy your way out of difficulties or into what you desire. If you're poor, you don't have that option so having some other sort of control e.g. through having your interests taken seriously through the vote or in other ways can be attractive.
Whether the reality matches up is another matter. But too many of the well off in this country have been blind to the fact that what suits them does not suit a large proportion of their fellow citizens. It is a pity that it has taken the referendum vote for this to be made clear to them.
Brexit may hurt the poor. Or it may help them. That rather depends on how it is done. I hope that the authorities do pay a bit more, quite a lot more, in fact, attention to those they've rather ignored until now.
Incidentally, the use of the word "sovereignty" is a bit of a red herring. It's the idea that in Britain the interests of the British people should be put first and that we should be masters in our own house. The extent to which people felt that this was not the case was, to an extent that was unacceptable, is what the loss of sovereignty meant to a lot of people, I suspect.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
You don't get it, Sean. Our entire economic policy post 90s has been about being a friendly, low regulation and low tax base for FDI that wants to be in the EU.
The growth or otherwise of the EU is not entirely relevant.
You have a point that a lot of people have not seen the gains, but that is our fault, not the EUs. We have one of the most lopsided growth models, regionally speaking, in the OECD.
That's got to be Microsoft Edge, best off binning it, its just clickbait
WTF has that got to do with anything? It's obviously a bit of conversation prompter.
Are you competing for FunSponge of the Day?
its where that sort of rubbish comes from, the 20 films with the actress with the biggest boobs, the 29 films where the actor/actress looks ghastly now compared to 20 yrs ago, that sort of crap, clogs up you pc downloading ads and videos.. avoid like the plague...
Does anyone actually care who they are ..
You thought it was worth pontificating on with your funsponge head on. Again.
Well .. clickbait is really annoying.. You'd never believe how Emily saved this little cat .. 29 clicks later and ages waiting for crap to l,oad.. No thanks.. Not interested..
That's my 5ps worth of pontificating.. off to purge my pc!
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
They would not be, they would just transfer the investment to the Continent, the Japanese have no sentimental attachment to the UK as the document yesterday made clear, if we leave the single market completely they are not going to raise their costs out of any loyalty to us
If one is shutting sites, paying out huge redundancy payments, and then purchasing land, plant, and hiring fresh workers in another country, that's a huge write off.
I struggle to see how it's an open and shut case since free trade in goods should be very straightforward to negotiate, and a low, competitive corporation tax regime should be quite attractive.
If UK manufactured cars exported to the EU need to conform with EU standards then there's no reason why they shouldn't do so, just as for any other paying customer.
But I think you underestimate the value - to some - of decisions being made by politicians in Britain, answerable to the British electorate - rather than being made elsewhere. Self-government, even when this involves trade-offs rather than the British electorate.
I rather dislike this poo-poohing (and I am not addressing this to you personally) of democracy. The people may, in some eyes, be foolish but I prefer a system where foolish people have a say to one where they don't.
Of course, I agree with your .
Indeed before Brexit we had a part in drafting the rules. Now our European neighbours will draft the rules. Our place is only to decide whether we sign up to others rules, or leave the business off.
Or design our own rules which may be more attractive to business than EU rules. There is no need for us to be passive players.
We did in theory have a part in drafting rules. In reality, our chances of getting something we wanted or stopping something that we thought harmful to our interests were pretty small. The gap between the theory and reality was wide and getting wider. The failure of all politicians, British and European, to deal with this is one reason why Brexit happened.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one g snip
Only Leadsom, Gove and maybe Boris would have done hard BREXIT, May is sensible and will not send the economy into recession and potentially break up the Union just to appease UKIP and a few fanatics on the Tory right
Seriously? What nonsense re Gove and Boris - and Leadsom spent years learning about the complexities but could be pushed.
TBH, I'm mostly bored of Brexit stuff for now. We've had a referendum, a result, a new PM and it's still early days. It's conference that will be interesting.
BREXIT will dominate conference and politics for the next few years
That's got to be Microsoft Edge, best off binning it, its just clickbait
WTF has that got to do with anything? It's obviously a bit of conversation prompter.
Are you competing for FunSponge of the Day?
its where that sort of rubbish comes from, the 20 films with the actress with the biggest boobs, the 29 films where the actor/actress looks ghastly now compared to 20 yrs ago, that sort of crap, clogs up you pc downloading ads and videos.. avoid like the plague...
Does anyone actually care who they are ..
You thought it was worth pontificating on with your funsponge head on. Again.
Well .. clickbait is really annoying.. You'd never believe how Emily saved this little cat .. 29 clicks later and ages waiting for crap to l,oad.. No thanks.. Not interested..
That's my 5ps worth of pontificating.. off to purge my pc!
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
You don't get it, Sean. Our entire economic policy post 90s has been about being a friendly, low regulation and low tax base for FDI that wants to be in the EU.
The growth or otherwise of the EU is not entirely relevant.
You have a point that a lot of people have not seen the gains, but that is our fault, not the EUs. We have one of the most lopsided growth models, regionally speaking, in the OECD.
Time for a new policy.
In future the FDI case will be based around a politically stable and competitive Britain that is at the heart of a global free trade network.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
Nissan Sunderland employs 6,700 people. I'm sure it supports many more in its supply chain, but it would be quite jolly if we could stop pulling numbers out of our collective arses.
"The future of car production at Nissan's factory in Sunderland could be at risk, the automaker's president and chief executive Carlos Ghosn has warned.
In an interview with BBC News Online, Mr Ghosn made it clear that the plant's future would depend on whether the UK adopted the euro.
"We are worried about having our cost base in pounds and to have our revenue base in euros," he said.
"This is a situation we don't like.
"We had this situation when we decided to make the investments on the Micra.""
"Facing a weak, unpopular and incompetent Labour leader in Jeremy Corbyn, the Tories could not just hold on to power in 2020 - but win with a landslide."
There can be no reconciliation after this if Jezza wins.
Things can only get worse, as I think we said in 1997.
The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
We can write the rules for ourselves, but can no longer influence them in our biggest export market by a big margin, while previously we could. While in collaborative discussions no-one gets exclusive say, there is some analysis that suggests that over the years the final EU position was closest to the UK initial position than any of the other major EU countries or the Commission.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
If by "hard Brexit" you mean out and a reversion to WTO rules for trade and we make up our own rules for matters like immigration then I am inclined to agree with you, Doc. I also think that is where we are likely to end up; not least because everything else seems to depend on wishful thinking and/or not being willing to walk away from the negotiating table. As I have remarked before if you are not willing to walk away from the table then you are begging not negotiating and Mrs May does not strike e as a begging type.
As of yesterday hard BREXIT means at least 400 000 job losses in the North East and Midlands as Japanese factories move en masse to the continent. May will not take political suicide hence her backtracking on most of the Vote Leave platform today
I think it unlikely they'd want to write off billions of pounds of investment, just like that.
Nissan Sunderland employs 6,700 people. I'm sure it supports many more in its supply chain, but it would be quite jolly if we could stop pulling numbers out of our collective arses.
"NMUK is one of the most productive car plants in Europe, producing more 'cars per worker' than any other factory." Wikipedia
That was also true in early 1990s. Quite remarkable that it is still the case 20 years later. What company would throw away that asset?
The Japanese could and would if it made long-term sense. Nissan have two factories in Spain.
JLR have broken ground on a Slovakian factory, it's just a matter of shifting future investment priorities.
It would likely be more a withering on the vine than a throwing of the toys out of the pram.
On the PLP Shad Cab (heh) elections.. surely this is good for the rebels?
It depends whether they want to be blamed for GE 2020 meltdown. If they are in Shadow Cabinet and obviously causing the anointed one difficulties, then they will be seen as guilty by the Corbynista surely?
And Corbyn isn't obliged to give them real jobs...
He could give them wimmins jobs - the really important ones we never thought of until he said so.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
Failure to think outside the box, and risk/loss aversion.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
You don't get it, Sean. Our entire economic policy post 90s has been about being a friendly, low regulation and low tax base for FDI that wants to be in the EU.
The growth or otherwise of the EU is not entirely relevant.
You have a point that a lot of people have not seen the gains, but that is our fault, not the EUs. We have one of the most lopsided growth models, regionally speaking, in the OECD.
Then we have to change the model, since it delivers low growth and a gigantic trade deficit with the EU (whereas we have a healthy surplus with the rest of the world).
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
If thousands of skilled lower middle-class workers lose their jobs in the Midlands with the knock on to the local economy bang goes May's majority at the next election, they may even have nothing to lose by voting for Corbyn
Thousands of lower middle class workers aren't going to lose their jobs.
Oh they will if the Japanese and South Koreans warnings are ignored, potentially hundreds of thousands of skilled working class and lower middle-class workers and voters will lose their jobs
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
Oh, the too poor and stupid to understand rationale again. We're perfectly capable of making an assessment, thanks awfully.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
Oh, the too poor and stupid to understand rationale again. We're perfectly capable of making an assessment, thanks awfully.
Another example. Oh look its from a Moderator! Still it is an improvement on the misogynistic dockland hooker stuff?
TheScreamingEagles said: Fucking hell another Brexiteer with fuck all knowledge of history. I expect the partition of Scotland to be messy. I know Brexiteers are thick and uneducated but...
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
Our growth is not that spectacular either and of course Europe is the wealthiest continent outside North America so has less room to grow and in any case Brazil is now faring worse on some measures than Europe. However really the U.S. and Far East see the UK as a bridge into Europe, if we destroy that bridge their companies may as well pack up and move to the Continent itself
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
Failure to think outside the box, and risk/loss aversion.
That's what although I voted remain, I am not too worried. Maybe, down the line, things will be different. But so will the world.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
You don't get it, Sean. Our entire economic policy post 90s has been about being a friendly, low regulation and low tax base for FDI that wants to be in the EU.
The growth or otherwise of the EU is not entirely relevant.
You have a point that a lot of people have not seen the gains, but that is our fault, not the EUs. We have one of the most lopsided growth models, regionally speaking, in the OECD.
Time for a new policy.
In future the FDI case will be based around a politically stable and competitive Britain that is at the heart of a global free trade network.
Indeed. We've no other choice left.
But actually, trade gains are getting harder to deliver and the politics of trade are getting tougher. We would have been better off advocating freer trade (services) within and out with the EU.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
You don't get it, Sean. Our entire economic policy post 90s has been about being a friendly, low regulation and low tax base for FDI that wants to be in the EU.
The growth or otherwise of the EU is not entirely relevant.
You have a point that a lot of people have not seen the gains, but that is our fault, not the EUs. We have one of the most lopsided growth models, regionally speaking, in the OECD.
Then we have to change the model, since it delivers low growth and a gigantic trade deficit with the EU (whereas we have a healthy surplus with the rest of the world).
Not in August when we had a deficit with the rest of the world overall, our surpluses are mainly services based
The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Lol. Got to love that negative campaigning. Worked so well last time...
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
Exactly 48% voted Remain only 3% is needed from Leave to ensure softish Brexit
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout. urther.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
I think the idea of taking back control may be something which appeals more to the poor than to the rich. If you're rich you can buy your way out of difficulties or into what you desire. If you're poor, you don't have that option so having some other sort of control e.g. through having your interests taken seriously through the vote or in other ways can be attractive.
Whether the reality matches up is another matter. But too many of the well off in this country have been blind to the fact that what suits them does not suit a large proportion of their fellow citizens. It is a pity that it has taken the referendum vote for this to be made clear to them.
Brexit may hurt the poor. Or it may help them. That rather depends on how it is done. I hope that the authorities do pay a bit more, quite a lot more, in fact, attention to those they've rather ignored until now.
Incidentally, the use of the word "sovereignty" is a bit of a red herring. It's the idea that in Britain the interests of the British people should be put first and that we should be masters in our own house. The extent to which people felt that this was not the case was, to an extent that was unacceptable, is what the loss of sovereignty meant to a lot of people, I suspect.
@Gardenwalker has it. The reality will be that Brexit means we will have to face up to ourselves and that it is and has been our own decisions that have been responsible for much of the woes that eg. the poor have suffered.
OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.
It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
If thousands of skilled lower middle-class workers lose their jobs in the Midlands with the knock on to the local economy bang goes May's majority at the next election, they may even have nothing to lose by voting for Corbyn
Thousands of lower middle class workers aren't going to lose their jobs.
Oh they will if the Japanese and South Koreans warnings are ignored, potentially hundreds of thousands of skilled working class and lower middle-class workers and voters will lose their jobs
Whatever. This is the Japanese and South Korean governments sabre rattling on behalf of their businesses and interests, in no small part because they've smelt that the UK Government isn't quite sure what to do yet, and they hope to influence the outcome.
Conversely, it's the job of the UK to act on behalf of our people's interests, particularly given the mandate they've just been given.
We would all do the same, on either side.
Whatever the settlement is the North East isn't going to become a barren wasteland off the back of it.
The Open Britain document which you can download on the website calls this brilliantly. Accept Brexit is happening but then list gazillions of negative outcomes that must be guaranteed not to happen. But crucially these are negative outcomes that will affect many people in particular who voted Leave in general. You win campaigns by changing the minds of people who didn't vote for you.
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, conomic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the with region of the world?
Our growth is not that spectacular either and of course Europe is the wealthiest continent outside North America so has less room to grow and in any case Brazil is now faring worse on some measures than Europe. However really the U.S. and Far East see the UK as a bridge into Europe, if we destroy that bridge their move to the Continent itself
No one is saying that trade with the EU is about to come to an end. Loads of foreign companies have a very powerful vested interest in trading with us, and investing in the UK, whether or not we're in the EU. Just as they did prior to our joining.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
As we banged on at length about on here, the concept of sovereignty is important to those who are too rich or too poor to deal with the Brexit fallout.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
If thousands of skilled lower middle-class workers lose their jobs in the Midlands with the knock on to the local economy bang goes May's majority at the next election, they may even have nothing to lose by voting for Corbyn
Thousands of lower middle class workers aren't going to lose their jobs.
Oh they will if the Japanese and South Koreans warnings are ignored, potentially hundreds of thousands of skilled working class and lower middle-class workers and voters will lose their jobs
Yeah right, just as our economy was going to fall off a cliff after 23rd June.
Of course there are alternative and highly credible alternative economic models for a post Hard Brexit UK. We're an old and extremely resourceful country. It's just all those alternative models will be even more alien to the bulk of Brexit voters than the current one. Globalist Brexiteers are vastly over represented on here. They are currently lionising protections and greviences ridden voters they normally hate because they've blamed the EU for a while rather than Thatcher. If Doncaster blames Thatcher for it's old it's Pity City. If it blames the EU it's a British Lion.
Thanks is a brilliant strategy until you finally win. Now you have won. You've toppled Saddam's Statue but what happens next ? I think the varying tribes are going to turn on each other then you. The Sykes/Picot agreement of populism is never winning. When you win the contradictory coalitions you assemble as a populist collapse. Trust me I'm an ex Liberal Democrat.
WRT Brexit, I think we've reached the limit, not just in this country, but in several other countries, of political integration to achieve economic gains - in part because the economic gains are so paltry for so many people. I think that people increasingly cherish sovereignty and democracy over and above slight economic gains.
Not when they lose their job and can't pay the mortgage they don't!
There's a real unreality about this. People write as if the EU is in the midst of an economic boom, which we're going to miss out on, whereas the reality is one of low economic growth which won't anytime soon. Where is the advantage in pursuing integration with a low -growth region of the world?
You don't get it, Sean. Our entire economic policy post 90s has been about being a friendly, low regulation and low tax base for FDI that wants to be in the EU.
The growth or otherwise of the EU is not entirely relevant.
You have a point that a lot of people have not seen the gains, but that is our fault, not the EUs. We have one of the most lopsided growth models, regionally speaking, in the OECD.
Then we have to change the model, since it delivers low growth and a gigantic trade deficit with the EU (whereas we have a healthy surplus with the rest of the world).
Again, my point is that the EU does not deliver low growth; individual countries may not have been growing much but that is different.
Membership of the EU has assisted in delivering massive FDI for the UK since the 90s; but we failed to get our own house in order, watched London race away while everywhere else lagged, and we are trying to blame the EU.
There is no other *trade* model which helps balance between London and the rest. We have to do it ourselves.
Comments
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/14/worlds-oldest-cat-tragically-dies-just-days-after-breaking-recor/
Being a member of The League of Empire Loyalists is ex officio* of being a Brexiteer.
*Latin from ex out of from' + officium duty
The suppliers are now restoring backups, but you can imagine the chaos with 10 days work to catch up on.
In case anyone reads this as wavering, I have a pro-Corbyn piece coming out on Labour List tomorrow. But there is more common ground than wild-eyed people of any faction might like to think.
But what done is done. We must Brexit, and I think a hard Brexit is the best way.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1170783/Did-know-glass-wine-equals-fishfingers-Government-target-middle-class-drinkers-calorie-counting-campaign.html
The perils of relying on someone else's servers to run a business - if there's lots of insurance companies affected, there's a reasonable chance of a class action against the supplier for negligence if it takes them so long to restore a system.
Labour MPs to hold ballot tomorrow on whether to return to system of Lab MPs electing Shadow Cabinet. Ballot agreed at PLP without dissent
Paul Waugh
Clive Betts tols plp his Shad Cab elections plan was "conciliatory proposal". Not a single person spoke against. Ballot between 10 + 5 tmrw
Will they continue to be? Perhaps. It is a gamble because the EU will now take its lead from the legislators, not the regulators.
Paul Kirkby
The 30 actors who most appear in the best movies. https://t.co/LgofGKblaO https://t.co/IjSt2VHqrM
However Corbyn is one step ahead and is now proposing that the shadow cabinet be elected by the members instead of the PLP, basically reverting control back to him through the members.
‘Boris? Well, he’s the life and soul of the party but he’s not the man you want driving you home at the end of the evening.’
They are now colleagues.
I know only 13 of those 30.
That's got to be Microsoft Edge, best off binning it, its just clickbait
I guess that's tomorrow's popcorn sorted anyway!
Are you competing for FunSponge of the Day?
Signing up totrade agreements while over a barrel with the clock ticking is doomed to failure. Either agree to something sub-optimal or get hard Brexit without preparation.
Better to plan for hard Brexit, breaking off all institutional ties, then start negotiations.
It is a failing of our political class that those too poor were both not involved in any benefits the EU brought, nor engaged enough to understand how Brexit would not help them, indeed it might even hurt them further.
It remains the case, however, that Brexit, and this idea of sovereignty, has also been a rich man's plaything.
Of course people don't want to be poor. But those who think that economics is the alpha and omega of politics (a very Marxist view, it has to be said) forget that self-respect is also important.
Ireland would probably have done better economically had it remained within the British Empire. But the economy does not always trump everything for everyone.
(the get stuffed bit not the messy accident - the latter was deployed to get shot of the SNPs ancestors lol!)
Does anyone actually care who they are ..
TBH, I'm mostly bored of Brexit stuff for now. We've had a referendum, a result, a new PM and it's still early days. It's conference that will be interesting.
We are likely to realise that we can actually do little about migration (that is not economically harmful), and I wouldn't mind betting we will not change the CFA and CAP arrangements much either. We have already signalled that we are likely to stay in the EAW.
So Brexit will amount to a significant loss of trade influence, the ability to sign our own deals, and an enhanced feeling of sovereignty.
Somehow we fooled ourselves it was the "EU", when it was us all along. Perhaps, if anything, Brexit means coming face to face with reality.
Yes, that's a bit silly - but I say it to make a point: at some stage there is a tipping point between influence and being influenced against your wishes.
The U.K. electorate decided that the EU had progressed past that point, and were on the balance of probabilities likely to go even further in future, and so voted to Leave.
"Facing a weak, unpopular and incompetent Labour leader in Jeremy Corbyn, the Tories could not just hold on to power in 2020 - but win with a landslide."
There can be no reconciliation after this if Jezza wins.
Things can only get worse, as I think we said in 1997.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UgeshLMA2j8
That was also true in early 1990s. Quite remarkable that it is still the case 20 years later. What company would throw away that asset?
Deselections on a mass scale will be their reward
Whether the reality matches up is another matter. But too many of the well off in this country have been blind to the fact that what suits them does not suit a large proportion of their fellow citizens. It is a pity that it has taken the referendum vote for this to be made clear to them.
Brexit may hurt the poor. Or it may help them. That rather depends on how it is done. I hope that the authorities do pay a bit more, quite a lot more, in fact, attention to those they've rather ignored until now.
Incidentally, the use of the word "sovereignty" is a bit of a red herring. It's the idea that in Britain the interests of the British people should be put first and that we should be masters in our own house. The extent to which people felt that this was not the case was, to an extent that was unacceptable, is what the loss of sovereignty meant to a lot of people, I suspect.
The growth or otherwise of the EU is not entirely relevant.
You have a point that a lot of people have not seen the gains, but that is our fault, not the EUs. We have one of the most lopsided growth models, regionally speaking, in the OECD.
That's my 5ps worth of pontificating.. off to purge my pc!
If UK manufactured cars exported to the EU need to conform with EU standards then there's no reason why they shouldn't do so, just as for any other paying customer.
https://infogr.am/ohio_income_vs_us_income
Ohio is more than 80% white.
IMO Diane suffers from the same issues - patronising tone/you're all primary school level to me.
In future the FDI case will be based around a politically stable and competitive Britain that is at the heart of a global free trade network.
In an interview with BBC News Online, Mr Ghosn made it clear that the plant's future would depend on whether the UK adopted the euro.
"We are worried about having our cost base in pounds and to have our revenue base in euros," he said.
"This is a situation we don't like.
"We had this situation when we decided to make the investments on the Micra.""
bbc news 7 Oct 2002
While Operation Session has breached the south coast and it's national disaster we *can* run a very credible and successful resistance movement. We need shifting alliances with individual groups who cheered the invasion but will come to hate the occupation. We can't defeat the Referendum militarily, we lost, but we can make a huge chunk of softer Brexiteers feel the long term cost of occupation is too high so they sue for a peaceful compromise.
JLR have broken ground on a Slovakian factory, it's just a matter of shifting future investment priorities.
It would likely be more a withering on the vine than a throwing of the toys out of the pram.
TheScreamingEagles said:
Fucking hell another Brexiteer with fuck all knowledge of history. I expect the partition of Scotland to be messy. I know Brexiteers are thick and uneducated but...
But actually, trade gains are getting harder to deliver and the politics of trade are getting tougher. We would have been better off advocating freer trade (services) within and out with the EU.
Mailonline is now basically NSFW due to the sidebar of shame.
Open Britain are a talking shop for Europhiles. Their "pamplet" is trash. Whoever wrote it did not do their homework.
OK that's fine - evidently no political system, or colour of government was going to fix it, not Lab, not Cons so the UK had to do something drastic; like cutting down your apple tree to get the ball back that was stuck in the branches.
It's a shame, though, because it really was not the EU that was responsible for the poverty in the UK, nor for taking our "sovereignty" and forcing us to do very much against our will that we might not have done anyway.
Conversely, it's the job of the UK to act on behalf of our people's interests, particularly given the mandate they've just been given.
We would all do the same, on either side.
Whatever the settlement is the North East isn't going to become a barren wasteland off the back of it.
Thanks is a brilliant strategy until you finally win. Now you have won. You've toppled Saddam's Statue but what happens next ? I think the varying tribes are going to turn on each other then you. The Sykes/Picot agreement of populism is never winning. When you win the contradictory coalitions you assemble as a populist collapse. Trust me I'm an ex Liberal Democrat.
Membership of the EU has assisted in delivering massive FDI for the UK since the 90s; but we failed to get our own house in order, watched London race away while everywhere else lagged, and we are trying to blame the EU.
There is no other *trade* model which helps balance between London and the rest. We have to do it ourselves.